Theodore's World

NOAM CHOMSKY ATTACKS ‘TERRORIST STATE’ U.S., ISRAEL WHILE VISITING HEZBOLLAH LEADER
MIT professor Noam Chomsky met with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut today and branded the U.S. a terrorist state.

“I think that Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and a persuasive argument that they (the weapons) should be in the hands of Hizbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression and there is plenty of background and reasons for that. So, I think his position, if I am reporting it correctly, and it seems to be a reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region and the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent. The Lebanese army cannot be a deterrent.”

There is a meaning to the word terrorist, in fact you can read a definition of term terrorist is the U.S. code of laws. It gives a very clear, precise, adequate definition of the word terrorist. have been writing about terrorism for 25 years always using the official U.S. definition [of the word “terrorist”], but that definition is un-usable, and the reason is that when you use that definition it turns out, not surprisingly, that the U.S is one of the leading terrorist states, and the other states become terrorist or non-terrorist depending on how they are relating to U.S. goals.”

“The regional superpower Israel is threatening to attack it [Iran], the U.S. is threatening to attack it. These threats alone are outright violations international law and of the U.N. charter. Iran is in difficulty. Iran has been trying for some years to negotiate settlement but the U.S. just refuses.”

Noam Chomsky’s Love Affair with Nazis
Frontpage Magazine
Rarely has the world been afforded such a clear glimpse into the unholy alliance between Islamic extremists and secular radicals in the West. That’s exactly what it got last week when the foremost Imam of the radical Left, Noam Chomsky, bestowed his blessings on the world’s largest terrorist army, the Shiite jihad outfit sponsored by Iran and known as Hezbollah (“Party of God.”)
Following a meeting with Hassan Nasrallah, the Lebanese terrorist group’s “secretary general,” Chomsky announced his support for Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm. Then, in an echo of Nasrallah’s recent declaration that President Bush is the world’s top “terrorist,” Chomsky pronounced his own fatwa on the United States calling it one of the “leading terrorist states.” It was a meeting of murderous radical minds.
In many ways, Chomsky’s newly forged friendship with Hezbollah — the most recent entry in a lifetime befriending America’s most deadly enemies — is the logical continuation of the professor’s longstanding admiration for global terrorists and Jew-haters. In fact, Chomsky devoted most of the nineties to touting Hezbollah as a “resistance” movement (which occasionally committed misguided acts against civilians) while singing its praises as a crusader for peace and social justice.
Wild Thing’s comment……..
I don’t think Chomsky has ever met a dictator or terrorist he didn’t like.His hatred of the US,Israel,and democracy is pathalogical. The articles above once again call the jihadists radical, I just have this to say……. I have yet to hear a Muslim speak that is not radical.

US sanctions Venezuela over terrorism: official
Mon May 15, 2006 – 1:20 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States imposed sanctions on Venezuela on Monday, banning all arms sales to a major oil supplier for what it believes is a lack of help in Washington’s war on terrorism, a State Department official said.
The move plummets the two nations’ ties to their worst level in decades and comes after years of antagonism between leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Washington on issues ranging from trade to oil prices.
The United States is concerned about Chavez’s friendly relationship with Cuba and Iran, two countries it says sponsor terrorism, and his failure to stop Colombian leftist guerrillas using Venezuelan territory, the U.S. official said.
Venezuela has warned for months the United States would move against it over terrorism but says it cooperates with Colombia against guerrillas and denies its ties with countries that are U.S. foes mean that it helps militants.

New York Sun Editorial
No sooner had the man who ran the National Security Agency for years been nominated to head the CIA than USA Today rushed out details of our efforts to use technical means to find terrorists using the phones. And no sooner had USA Today disclosed details of an apparent attempt by the National Security Agency to defend Americans from terrorists than the Democratic Party and its leading politicians and interest groups went on the attack. Not against the terrorists but against President Bush.

“This is another example of the Bush Administration misleading the American people,” said a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, Stacie Paxton.

Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts called the program “abusive” and said :

“Today’s shocking disclosures make it more important than ever for the Republican Congress to end its complicity in the White House cover up of its massive domestic surveillance program. When three major telephone companies are supplying the administration with records of all Americans regardless of any hint of wrongdoing, Congress can’t look the other way.”

Rep. Harold Ford Jr., a Democrat of Tennessee, went on Fox News Channel to call the news “disturbing.” Senator Clinton pronounced herself “deeply disturbed.”

Mrs. Clinton might want to have a talk with her husband. It was President Clinton who signed into law the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994, after it was passed in both the House and Senate by a voice vote.
That law is an act “to make clear a telecommunications carrier’s duty to cooperate in the interception of communications for law enforcement purposes, and for other purposes.

” The act made clear that a court order isn’t the only lawful way of obtaining call information, saying, “A telecommunications carrier shall ensure that any interception of communications or access to call-identifying information effected within its switching premises can be activated only in accordance with a court order or other lawful authorization.”

The law that President Clinton signed into law and that was approved by voice votes in 1994 by a Democrat-majority House and a Democrat-majority Senate not only made clear the phone companies’ “duty” to cooperate, it authorized $500 million in taxpayer funds to reimburse the phone companies for equipment “enabling the government, pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, to access call-identifying information that is reasonably available to the carrier.”
Again, the law, by referring to “other lawful authorization,” states clearly that a court order isn’t the only form of lawful authorization possible.
President Bush struck exactly the right notes yesterday.

“So far we’ve been very successful in preventing another attack on our soil,” Mr. Bush said. “As a general matter, every time sensitive intelligence is leaked, it hurts our ability to defeat this enemy. Our most important job is to protect the American people from another attack, and we will do so within the laws of our country.”

If he seemed calm about the latest disclosures, we can’t help wondering whether it’s because he recognizes that when Americans go to sleep at night, they’re less worried about the “danger” that the government is looking for terrorists than they are about the danger that terrorists are looking for them.
This is the issue that the Democrats of the Howard-Dean-John-Kerry era just don’t seem to prepared to credit. The Democrats who controlled the White House and both houses of Congress in 1994 showed signs of understanding the national security issues at stake here when they passed the law. Their understanding seems to have eroded since then. It can’t be that they feel America faces less of a threat – if anything, the attacks of September 11, 2001, make the case for such programs even stronger. What’s changed isn’t the enemy threat but the party that now controls the White House. Which explains why Mrs. Clinton is “deeply disturbed” about activities legal under a law her husband signed.
And then there is also this…..based on a Newsmax article the dimwittocRATS actually are going to try to stop the NSA terrorism surveillance programs. They’re joining a lawsuit to do just that.
Dems Join Suit to Ban Terrorist Surveillance

71 House Democrats signed up to sponsor a move that would make it illegal for the NSA to continue to monitor terrorist phone calls.
The liberal web site Raw Story reported Thursday:
“The 71 Democrats and one independent filed an amicus brief in two federal courts reviewing challenges to the warrantless wiretapping program in Detroit and New York, joining the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights.”
“Both suits demand the program be stopped.”

Michigan Democrat John Conyers led the charge:

“As our brief makes clear, this Congress dealt with this issue authoritatively almost 30 years ago – warrantless spying on American soil is flatly prohibited,” he railed.

Wild Thing’s comment…..
It seems if you can find a method to catch terrorists, the Democrats and their ACLU handmaidens can find a way to try to stop it. But then we already KNOW the Democrats are on the side of the terrorists!
During WW II, President Roosevelt ordered the Post Office to open and read all mail to and from American citizens where the mail came from or went to any jurisdiction currently controlled by the Axis powers. This was far more intrusive, and done without Congressional approval, compared to the present program of noting patterns of numbers called, without looking into the contents of the phone calls, and being done under a law duly passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton.
Both the Democrats and their supporters in the press are counting on the gross ignorance of the American public about American history, including what we did during and after WW II. So far, and sadly, the ignorance they are counting on seems to be endemic among the American people.

Reformation or Revolution?
by Heidi and Kit at Euphoric Reality
Tonight, the President will address the nation on his plans for illegal immigration. Unfortunately, he’s already given his word to Vicente Fox on Sunday that his plan to put a few National Guard troops on the border is just a temporary formality, of sorts, and not meant to intimidate anyone. Right. Heaven forbid we intimidate anyone to deter them from breaking our laws!
The question then arises, who does Bush feel more compelled to explain himself to – us Americans or the Mexicans? He owes the American people everything , and the Mexican government nothing! So why is he assuring Fox of anything concerning our internal national policies?!
I have no illusions about what we’ll hear from President Bush tonight. But before he tries to lull anyone into complacency tonight, let’s look at the reality of the Goode Amendment, which Bush will no doubt reference in his speech tonight. Troops on the border to bolster security? It’s not what it sounds like:

OK, here are the dirty little secrets.
“(d) Conditions of Use- (1) Whenever a member who is assigned under subsection (a) to assist the Bureau of Border Security or the United States Customs Service is performing duties at a border location pursuant to the assignment, a civilian law enforcement officer from the agency concerned shall accompany the member.”
So, each military member will simply now be a buddy for a Border Patrol guy.
Now look at this;
“(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to–
(A) authorize a member assigned under subsection (a) to conduct a search, seizure, or other similar law enforcement activity or to make an arrest;”
So, the military has nada authority.
BUT it gets better;
“(h) Termination of Authority- No assignment may be made or continued under subsection (a) after September 30, 2007.’”
This is a ONE YEAR DEAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bush’s speech tonight seems to be a weak bid to stem the hemorrhage of voters from the Republican Party. As the party’s leader, Bush has a responsibility to lead and direct his party, and he may just be leading it to a crushing defeat in the upcoming elections. People who voted for Bush not once, but twice, are abandoning the Republican Party in droves. On a recent news radio poll, 80% of the callers who had voted for Bush twice, now heartily disapprove of him. Of that 80%, 90% of them said it was due to his mishandling of our border security. But Democrats shouldn’t celebrate any victories yet, because it’s not just Republicans – what it’s doing to the two-party system is even worse.
This issue is splitting the American people into a majority who demand border security and immigration enforcement and a small, but vocal minority who demand amnesty. There are now two schools of thought coalescing around the faltering Republican Party and its bumbling missteps. The debate is happening now and we need to be a part of it. So let’s debate!
Kit and I dove into this a little deeper and have each represented a school of thought concerning the future of the Party, and by extension, our two party-system. In the interest of full disclosure, Kit is an increasingly-reluctant Republican and I am a furious Independent (formerly Republican who split from the party over a year ago).

(more…)

President Ahmadinejad of Iran wants a “World Without Zionism” (and without America).
I think this graphic above is a much better idea.

GROTON, Conn. (NNS) — USS Memphis (SSN 691) departed Naval Submarine Base New London May 6 on a surge deployment in support of the global war on terrorism.

Navy Newstand
From Commander, Submarine Group 2 Public Affairs
According to Cmdr. Joseph Wiegand, deputy commander for Operations and Training for Commander, Submarine Development Squadron (DEVRON) 12, surge deployments differ greatly from regularly scheduled deployments.

“Surge deployments are made to support real-world taskings from combatant commanders,” he said.

Memphis’ surge deployment coincides with the scheduled deployment of USS Alexandria (SSN 757), also of DEVRON 12, and the surge deployment of USS Louisville (SSN 724) of Submarine Squadron 3 in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. All three submarines deployed during the first week in May.

“This is a prime example of the high demand for submarine capabilities in operational theaters around the world,” Wiegand said. “The combatant commanders count on our boats to engage with a range of different threats around the world. They rely on the inherent strengths of speed, persistence, firepower, and agility that only a submarine can provide.”

Memphis returned from a scheduled deployment in November and has remained in a surge-ready status for the past six months.

“All submarines completing a deployment remain surge ready and in a high state of training,” said Wiegand.

Over the past six months, the crew of Memphis and the staff of DEVRON 12 have trained closely with the newly activated Cell for Submarine Counter-Terrorism Operations (CSCO).
The CSCO continuously worked with Memphis in training for mission planning, special forces certifications, and presented real-time lessons learned from other currently deployed submarines.

“The nuclear-powered submarine continues to bring a lot to the table when it comes to the day-to-day operations in the global war on terrorism,” explained Lt. Cmdr. David Kelly, deputy director of the CSCO. “Our submarine force has never been in higher demand than it is today, including in the heyday of the Cold War.”

Kelly added that nuclear-powered submarines are unique in that they are the one platform that can conduct forward missions against threats from traditional naval forces as well as engage in missions against the more elusive and scattered terrorist threats.
Missions that fast-attack submarines like Memphis conduct in support of the GWOT include intelligence-gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance, information operations, strike operations and special operations forces missions.
This surge deployment is a part of the Fleet Response Plan (FRP), a program developed to change the way Navy ships deploy and to provide the United States with a greater range of naval options, adding the element of flexibility to naval efficiency.
The idea behind FRP is to keep the Navy ready to surge and to vary the lengths of deployments, meaning the Navy will be ready to deploy whenever, wherever.

White House dismisses calls for direct Iran talks
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The White House on Sunday dismissed calls for direct talks with Iran to resolve the stand-off over its nuclear program, saying the United Nations was the best forum for those discussions.

“We think the framework we have is even better, we have a number of countries that are engaged with Iran on this issue, we are supportive of those discussions,” White House national security adviser Stephen Hadley told CNN.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged the United States on Friday to enter into direct talks with Tehran, as have others.
But Hadley said the United Nations was the preferred forum for the talks.

“The forum has now shifted to a discussion in the U.N. Security Council where the international community as a whole, of which the United States is a part, can make clear to Iran what it needs to do,” he told CNN’s “Late Edition. “We think that’s the right forum at this time for this issue.”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who sent an 18-page letter to President George W. Bush last week, said over the weekend that he was ready to talk with any country except Israel and not under threat of force.
Bush dismissed the letter, saying it did not addressing the issue of when Iran would abandon its nuclear program, which the West suspects is a cover for building weapons.
Iran says the program is merely for peaceful power generation.
Britain, France and Germany, backed by the United States, Russia and China, are to unveil a package of inducements and penalties for Iran depending on whether it cooperates or resists Western calls that it halt uranium enrichment.

“We are looking at the kinds of sanctions that might be applied if it does not make the right choice. We’re also looking at the kinds of benefits that might be applied if Iran does make the right choice,” Hadley said.

“There have been a lot of opportunities for Iran to make the right choice, which is respond to the will of the international community and give assurances, by getting out of the enrichment business, that it’s not pursuing a nuclear bomb,” he said..

Wild Thing’s comment…….
I have had it with this freak Ahmadinejad. He sends a long letter, beyond long ….18 pagers, to Bush that basically amounted to a declaration of war.
So far we have had tons of threats made by various leaders in Iran. Besides their ego’s needing to have a continuous 15 minutes of fame with their threat making, lies in speeches etc. Ahmadinejad thinks he can boss Bush and the USA around. I am thrilled Bush said NO to the talks right now. Iran should kiss our ass not the other way around.

On 10 May, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) posted an item titled:
“CAIR-CA: Muslims Concerned ‘United 93’ Creates Anti-Islam Sentiment”:
According to Bushra Khan, office manager for CAIR’s Arizona chapter, she and two Muslim friends were verbally assaulted by a couple who had apparently just watched the movie, “United 93”. The movie covered the events of September 11, 2001, when passengers and crew rose up and defended their fellow Americans by denying Islamic terrorists the opportunity to deliberately crash United flight 93 as their co-religionists had done earlier that horrible morning.
Bushra Khan, the office manager for the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Arizona chapter, was so upset that she sent a message out to all 31 CAIR offices nationwide about the incident. However, she apparently wasn’t offended enough to call the FBI or local law enforcement in to investigate yet another possible “anti-Muslim hate crime”.
Khan has the dubious distinction of working for CAIR, an organization that repeatedly has problems with facts; an organization that has consistently defended Muslims involved in “hate crimes” that never occurred, an organization that labels even the most innocuous of statements about Islam as “Islamophobia” in an effort to bully Americans into acceptance of CAIR as arbiter of everything Islamic in America. In short, CAIR promotes a version of Islam that is at odds with America and American values.
Consider:
August, 2004: CAIR demands law enforcement investigate an intentionally set fire at a Muslim-owned store as a possible “hate crime”. The police did investigate and ended up arresting the stores owner, Amjad Adnuar. CAIR, which had pressed for the investigation, was “stunned” when told that Adnuar had been arrested for torching his own store.
“Stunned”, indeed!
UPDATE: MAY 15th at 09:49
Taken from “Special Report” by Douglas Hagmann, Director of the NorthEast Intelligence Network:
From the article:

“On 11 May, 2006, I contacted the police department responsible for the protection of the citizens who visit this upscale mall to obtain a copy of the police report of this incident. As Ms. Khan and her companions expressed a genuine fear for their safety, it would not only be reasonable, but prudent to request police assistance when confronted in such a manner. Further, a review of the police report would provide additional avenues of investigation into this alleged verbal assault reportedly caused by “United 93.”
It was discovered that no police report exists; despite the fear expressed by the young women. Thinking that the women at least requested assistance from the security employed by the Desert Ridge Marketplace, I contacted that office on two occasions to inquire about the incident.
“This is the first I’ve heard about it,” stated the officer answering the telephone on May 10, 2006. “If something like that did happen, we would probably know about it, most definitely,” he added. At his urging, however, I contacted the officer in charge on the following day to see if any report of the incident was on file.
“We have no record of the incident. No one from our security detail responded to any complaint as you described,” he stated. “I can’t say that it didn’t happen, but if it did, we were never notified or called for assistance,” added the officer in charge.
In summary, it appears that the incident of verbal abuse that allegedly took place on or about April 29, 2006 was not reported to anyone outside of the CAIR organization despite the level of fear the victims expressed and the concern this incident has caused on a national level. My investigation failed to find any independent corroborating evidence that the verbal assault alleged by these three young Muslim women, one who is a CAIR employee, occurred in the manner in which it has been publicly reported. Although it might well have taken place as described, my investigation found no police report, no incident report on file with mall security, and no independent confirmation of this incident of verbal assault that is causing such a panic within the Muslim community.”

Wild Thing’s comment…….
CAIR’s whining is their middle name!
CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) – has NO redeeming qualities they are PRO terrorists! Muslims are treated much better in this country than Christians and Jews are treated in Muslim countries.
Now get this straight CAIR, it was Muslims that killed 3,000 people on 9-11. And Muslims are the ones that want to kill anyone that is not a Muslim. Now go sit in the corner and shut up!
Note the update above …… pretty amazing!!! Why I am shocked I tell you shocked. (not) How typical of them……(sipping my morning coffee and rasing one eyebrow).

Not In Our Name and the World Wide Terrorism Web
In the run-up to this war, Not In Our Name became one of the major “peace” organizers and coalitions in the United States. Not In Our Name has spared no cost purchasing ads in newspapers around the world to publish its anti-American Statement of Conscience. Its signatories include scores of Hate America bigwigs, like Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Michael Parenti, Gloria Steinem and Barbara Kingsolver. Hollywood icons (and many more has-beens) like Danny Glover, Jessica Lange, Tyne Daly, Martin Sheen and Ed Harris have also signed or endorsed the statement. NION organizes marches and other protest activities in its support.
However, Not In Our Name is deeper than the latest academic babblers and limosuine liberals. NION professes peace, yet it is involved – directly as well as indirectly – with terrorist organizations and anti-American propaganda campaigns headed by fanatical Communist and Muslim groups. NION has cemented alliances with bona fide radical organizations like the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and the Revolutionary Communist Party.
Not In Our Name: What is IFCO?
Not In Our Name (NION) requests donations on its website, yet on this site donors are asked to make checks payable to NION/IFCO. IFCO is the acronym for the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization. NION states that the ” Interreligous Foundation for Community Organization (IFCO)… is our fiscal sponsor.” Fiscal sponsorship by IFCO means Not In Our Name receives donations that are tax deductible because of IFCO’s 501c(3) (charitable, federal tax-exempt) status. IFCO charges a fee for this service.
The Interreligous Foundation for Community Organization is a pro-Castro proxy group. Members of their staff such as Lucius Walker (Executive Director), Marilyn Clement (Treasurer) and Ellen Bernstein (Grants Administrator) are all Castrophiles In Havana in November 2000, Lucius Walker proclaimed, “Long live the creative example of the Cuban Revolution! Long live the wisdom and heartfelt concern for the poor of the world by Fidel Castro!” This was a follow-up to his pro-Castro speech in 1996, commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Communist Party USA. Marilyn Clement is a co-organizer of the WILPF’s Sister-to-Sister Cuba project. The WILPF also issued a condemnation of Clinton’s Cuba policy in 1998. Bernstein was also quoted as saying she believes Cuba is the paradigm of democracy.
IFCO does not limit its activity to pro-Castro factions, though. Its management maintains relationships with extremist Islamist groups as well. Walker travels frequently to Iraq, usually alongside Ramsey Clark. IFCO is a member of ANSWER Steering Committee.) Bernstein is a member of the American Muslim Council’s campaign against the use of secret evidence. Clement met with Palestinians during a WILPF “solidarity” conference in May 2002. IFCO is also a fiscal sponsor of the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF). The co-founder of NCPPF was the recently indicted terrorist financier Sami Al-Arian.
However, NION’s links with Muslim terrorists are not just indirect, through IFCO. NION invited both Sami Al-Arian and Lynne Stewart to address their October 6, 2002 rally in Central Park. Stewart was indicted for passing messages on behalf of her terrorist client Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman.
One of the members of NION’s Advisory Board, Abdeen Jabara, is a member of the legal advisory board for the American Muslim Council. He is a past president of the Arab-American Ant-Discrimination Committee, a board member of William Kunstler’s Center for Constitutional Rights, and a co-counsel with Lynne Stewart for Sheik Rahman, the terrorist convicted for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Wild Thing’s comment…..
Is NION’s financial relationship with IFCO some innocuous charitable funding arrangement? Is it a coincidence that NION donations are funneled through an organization with links to communist and pro-Palestinian groups? Is it a coincidence that NION’s donations are mailed to an organization that has links with Castro? Is it a coincidence that NION is operated by an organization with links to Communist terrorists? And do the long list of entertainment industry notables who have signed onto its “Statement of Conscience” aware of NION’s links? If not, why not?